Appeal No. 96-0523
Application 07/910,763
The examiner relies upon the following prior art:
Quinn et al. (Quinn) 4,722,060 January 26, 1988
Stopper et al. (Stopper) 4,847,732 July 11, 1989
Claims 1-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Stopper and Quinn.
We refer to the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 15) for a
statement of the examiner's position and to the Appeal Brief
(Paper No. 14) and the Reply Brief (Paper No. 17) for a
statement of appellant's position.
OPINION
Grouping of claims
It is not clear exactly what the examiner means by the
discussion under the "Grouping of claims" (Examiner's Answer,
page 2). The examiner does not state, for example, what
claims are presumed to stand or fall together or point out how
the claims have not been separately argued. For the reasons
stated the Reply Brief, the claims cannot be considered to
stand or fall together, but must be considered individually,
although there is parallelism between the claims that
simplifies the analysis.
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007